TOPIC: Balanced County Budget? New Tax?

Just curious. Since when is it wrong to return a loan to it's rightful owners? The bust of Winston Churchill was a LOAN to President GW Bush from Tony Blair. It was to show solidarity between Britain and the U.S.A after 9/11. It was removed BEFORE President Obama was inaugurated. President Obama wanted to put his own mark, as is his right, on the Oval Office and he chose a bust of Abraham Lincoln. Point is, a loan is a loan. Loans are meant to be returned.

I have no comment on the County Budget.

I see several things grossly wrong with it. Number one, it was an affront to our most important ally in Europe. Secondly, it was an insult to the memory one of the world's greatest men/leaders of the twentieth century (and his family). Too bad it wasn't a bust of Chairman Mao, BO could have put it on his desk.

Number three, the LOAN could have been moved to the Smithsonian or similar location where the rest of us could have enjoyed it.

Number four, if it was before the inauguration, wouldn't he have better things to do than worry about the White House décor? Here's an idea: do background checks on your cabinet appointees.

And lastly, if he likes returning loans, he needs to get after it. China is waiting.

An affront to our most important ally? Seriously? That's where you're going to go with that? I guess you believe in aliens and unicorns, too. Right? The British press is going to make anything sound offensive if it serves them. If they were really that offended then they need thicker skin.

There is no IF about it being removed before the inauguration. It WAS moved before. It was part of the cleaning process that happens BEFORE a new president takes office. I guess no other president should be allowed to put a bust or decorate their office. I mean, they've got better things to do than make their home and office comfortable and to their liking, right?

He could have sent it to the Smithsonian but instead it went to the current British Ambassador to the United States. If the Brits wanted it in the Smithsonian they could have said to put it there. That's not what happened, though.

Seeing how this is a 3 year old issue I will not respond on this again.

what is in the budget that could be cut further or completely from the budget?

"Ask for a half-penny, but in for a nickle or a dime".
That seems to be the game being played. The new phone tax is just another way to raise additional revenues from YOUR pocket. In 2010, $78,781.00 was raised from new property being added to the tax rolls. In the 2011 budget, they raised more property taxes than they did in 2010 by eliminating the early pay tax discount for us taxpayers and raised an additional $120,879.00. There are lots of areas that could be examined within the county budget. Take the Sheriff's Office for example. (For county expenditures by function ): The S.O budget was 41% of total, at $1,793,101.00 and the Jail at 31%, or $1,345,655.00. This is a grand total of $3,138,756.00. With this figure in mind, realize that ALL the other offices, which include the Volunteer Fire Dept., The Hopkins County Fire Dept., two Constables, DPS/Parks & Wildlife, Dispatch, Adult & Juv. Probation,Child Abuse Prevention, etc., totals $1,240,707.00. What's wrong with this picture, and this is just one area?
Don't get me wrong. I think the Sheriff's Office or ANY safety personnel is the LAST place they should go for personnel cuts. However, lets take a look and ask some questions: Why does the Sheriff's Dept. always need so many new extended cab Ford trucks every year, which costs additional monies to make them ready for law enforcement use, (i.e. added wiring, electronics, etc.), when a sedan would serve the same purpose at lesser cost? What are the excuses? That they "may have to drive in a pasture"? So, why not field a couple of pick-ups every shift and use them on these types of calls as needed? How much could be saved if half the vehicles purchased were sedans, already mfg. "Police Ready"? Also, wouldn't a sedan use less fuel? How much would that save? And why are these vehicles "assigned" to officers who take them home at the end of their shift? Not all of them even live in Hopkins County! How much extra fuel costs does that cost us, the taxpayers, every year? Can't they afford to drive themselves to and from work? This could go on, but hopefully you get the picture. Every area should be shaved close. Every expenditure questioned. A lot of Hopkins County tax payers are hurting too. A lot are un-employed, elderly or disabled, and even more are on fixed incomes, and they do not get a raise every year either. By the way, these figures were not plucked from the air. Go to www.hopkinscountytx.org. Click on the Auditors office and you'll find the budget for both 2010 and 2011. Check it out yourself. Tell your Commissioner and the Co. Judge you want the hard changes made. I don't want to see anyone to get layed-off either, but I'll bet they will do so instead of cutting some of the "sacred cow Bennies". (Now, another question: If they lay 6 or 8 people off, but hire some additional people in another area/department, does it really even count? Will that get printed? NOT!).

some good points. but i'd like to address the issue of the vehicles for the sherriff..

i've got a good friend that's a constable in collin county, and spent about 30+ yrs on the dallas police department prior to being a constable. just so you know where i found my information...
cars have been slowly replaced in police departments (sherriff, etc) by either SUVs or trucks in recent yrs due to necessity. the needs of the jobs and the locations have somewhat changed, in that the required equipment has changed for the individual officers. some weapons, some protection (personal & vehicular), some electronic (computers, etc) and some officers or teams carry different equipment than others due to their selected responsibilities (for example, no all officers travel with a dog) - all must be carried in or on the vehicles. they all create a far heavier load, too heavy and too big in size or a sedan to carry, particularly when everything is placed in the trunk of a sedan. both dallas and collin counties have switched or have been switching to full size SUVs and pickups over the last few years. the wear and tear on a sedan just wouldn't hold up - particularly when you added in the human load of the officer(s) and an arrestee. (just watch some of the cops shows & see the size of some of those offenders...LOL).
also, they have to take into consideration the roads they travel on - and the sedans just can't hold up or function safely in many situations, unlike a taller vehicle like the truck or SUV. they offer a higher "seat" as well, making them more visible. (lesser need in that regards though).
the design of the sedan just isn't always robust enough to handle all the demands of the job.

with all that said, though, both dallas & collin counties do not replace their vehicles yearly....more like every 3-4 yrs, dependent upon needs, funds and dependability of the individual vehicle.

sometimes, the car manufacturer will also approach the powers that be with some really terrific designs and deals on new vehicles, too. that segment of the market for the manufacturers is an important part of their sales & they aggresively pursue departments - it's also sort of a "feather in their cap" and a great way for them to get some "results' they can crow about in their advertising, maybe even to include some of the designs into regular vehicles.

then again, there's also the scare of the crown victorias from over the years. remember all the news reports a couple yrs back in the north texas news (dallas / ft worth area) - there were some serious design issues in the safety of the vehicles.